[jmsaxon69]

   
This is about selling people "hi-res" downloads at premium prices *for having hi-res content*. Don't shift the goalposts.

You are correct, my bad...
 
I don't have the CD to compare it to, so it just sounds good to me

 

[Soundsgoodtome]

 
So this effects your enjoyment of this music how? Who gives a damn what the Spectrograph says, it sounds good to me.  I listen to music not measurements and graphs...But that's just me.  What if you found out your favorite album had a bad DR rating? Would it effect in any way how you feel about it?

It effects how I feel when I've paid $7-$15 more over a CD copy by buying Hi-res to no advantage in SQ. Instead of having 4-5 albums on a $50 budget, I only got 2-3 because I opted for hi-Res. Think about the 1 or 2 albums I didn't buy trying to stay in budget and the artists I didn't support. There's that too.

  What could you possibly have to complain about with Morning Phase? It sounds great, atmospheric with a huge sound stage.  Don't know what you are talking about on this one...

Well this makes me feel somewhat better on my purchase knowing Beck chose the gritty master over the cleaner one (thanks to the link you shared). However this thread is about HDtracks, their Hi-Res copy sounding just like the CD alternative.

 

[jmsaxon69]

...at least I got it for the new low price and 15% off of that, so I didn't really pay too much

 

[Soundsgoodtome]

  ...at least I got it for the new low price and 15% off of that, so I didn't really pay too much

$75 via HD Tracks with sale vs $45 for CD versions via AtoZ on Zepellin 3,4 and PG Deluxe Version. That's double the price for not having better SQ and not having a physical copy.

 

[jmsaxon69]

$75 via HD Tracks with sale vs $45 for CD versions via AtoZ on Zepellin 3,4 and PG Deluxe Version. That's double the price for not having better SQ and not having a physical copy.

Oh, you are saying it's all a scam? 24/96 etc is ALLWAYS a scam? Okay can't help you there man...smh

 

[Soundsgoodtome]

That's ok, I don't need help in feeling better about saving money. Lol
 
 
 

 

[joegiz]

...after I just spent $300 downloading some new tunes

 

[Soundsgoodtome]

Well, at least you got the music you wanted and didn't get it at 160kbps lossy

 

[joegiz]

Plus, after  I dusted off "The Brennan JB7" and listened to some CD's that I had ripped to 320 bps mp3's many years ago...and come to think of it, sounded pretty darn good. Used the JB7 >> WA2 (stock tubes, just bought the thing) >> HD800's.
Then played tracks 19, 20 from the Sinatra Collector Series CD (early release from Capitol Records)....and all I can say is WOW! 

 
Reading this thread and pulling out the CD's again....will make me think twice about downloading from HDtracks without doing some research. 
 
What about some of the other lesser known HD download vendors?   Regardless of the music type are there any you would consider more transparent and forthcoming?

 

[wgkwgk]

Well, great discussion.
 
I've spent the past three years deciding on my final audio set-up (Fireflies, 5 headphones (out of about ten tried); 4 IEM's out of 7 tried).  I've spent time deciding among the various Mp3 ripping options, and have compared to FLAC.  All done blind A/B.  MP3VBR-fine for me.  FLAC, yes.  I pull everything off of CD's, save some misc. downloads. I've listened and contributed in the forums--great experience.  (Members know far more than my humble knowledge.  Most appreciated!!!)
 
Conclusion:  I'm not interested in getting to HiRes quality, though I can appreciate the technical and production quality aspects that are fueling recent discussions). Go forth!  But I'm done!!!  I've reached the end-game in equipment and recording formats.   Now I'm moving to what we're all about--listening to music; learning about new (to me) artists/music; enjoying what the artists are communicating.
 
Best to all.
 
 wgkwgk  

 

[Soundsgoodtome]

  Well, great discussion.
 
I've spent the past three years deciding on my final audio set-up (Fireflies, 5 headphones (out of about ten tried); 4 IEM's out of 7 tried).  I've spent time deciding among the various Mp3 ripping options, and have compared to FLAC.  All done blind A/B.  MP3VBR-fine for me.  FLAC, yes.  I pull everything off of CD's, save some misc. downloads. I've listened and contributed in the forums--great experience.  (Members know far more than my humble knowledge.  Most appreciated!!!)
 
Conclusion:  I'm not interested in getting to HiRes quality, though I can appreciate the technical and production quality aspects that are fueling recent discussions). Go forth!  But I'm done!!!  I've reached the end-game in equipment and recording formats.   Now I'm moving to what we're all about--listening to music; learning about new (to me) artists/music; enjoying what the artists are communicating.
 
Best to all.
 
 wgkwgk  

Well said. There are a ton of artists to enjoy and some of the funnest is finding old CDs in bargain bins that you spend maybe $2-$3 on only to find you absolutely love the album...even though it came out way before you were even born.

FLAC files for sure, you can always convert them without loss to other lossy files whereas going from one lossy to another usually messes with the sound.

 

[HDtracks]

Hello all,
 
Thank you very much for all your comments and feedback.  We value each and every one of our users and potential users opinions.  We are constantly striving to make the HDtracks service as great as it can be.  With that being said, we test each and every release in house and independently for resolution and bit depth and stand by all of our designations.  We try to be as transparent as possible in the about section of all of our albums in regards to recording, mastering, remastering etc.  For example with the Beck album,  from the very first day it was made live we commented on the recording and particular tracks "Tracks 4, 5, 7, 10, 11 contain elements of 48k tracking, mastered in 96/24." 
 
We always request as much information as possible from the labels but sometimes they do not provide it or have much available.  They have thousands of sessions they oversee per year and to get detailed analysis of what happened on each session is a very time consuming and enormous task.  At the end of the day music is subjective and we believe as well as many people believe that our releases in many cases sound head and shoulders better than their mp3 or CD versions.   We are also aware that many times hi-res audio is better translated when the recording and mastering is done with hi-res audio in mind.  However we are simply a digital service provider and cannot hold back or not release particular albums.  We are not the judge and jury of people's art.  The musicians choose how they want their art to sound. 
 
At the very beginning of HDtracks due to our naivete we released a very few amount of albums that were not up to par with our hi-res designation.  This was due to hi-res audio being a very new thing, miscommunication between us and labels, us not doing our due diligence and a few other reasons.  Since then we have gone above and beyond to make sure we put out the very best product possible and test each and every file.  And in cases like the Beck album we give as much information as humanly possible to put forth all the information we have, so you the consumer can make an educated decision.

As you can see on this thread alone their are people who are very happy with the sound of the Beck album, once again because music is subjective and HDtracks is not going to take that away.  That is what makes music so amazing. 

With all that being said, we truly do welcome your feedback and will continue to try and bring high-resolution audio to higher heights and a more widely used audio format. Which will hopefully leader to higher awareness, when recording, mastering and delivering music. 

Thanks,

HDtracks

 

[shineonyou]

Hello all,

Thank you very much for all your comments and feedback.  We value each and every one of our users and potential users opinions.  We are constantly striving to make the HDtracks service as great as it can be.  With that being said, we test each and every release in house and independently for resolution and bit depth and stand by all of our designations.  We try to be as transparent as possible in the about section of all of our albums in regards to recording, mastering, remastering etc.  For example with the Beck album,  from the very first day it was made live we commented on the recording and particular tracks "Tracks 4, 5, 7, 10, 11 contain elements of 48k tracking, mastered in 96/24." 

We always request as much information as possible from the labels but sometimes they do not provide it or have much available.  They have thousands of sessions they oversee per year and to get detailed analysis of what happened on each session is a very time consuming and enormous task.  At the end of the day music is subjective and we believe as well as many people believe that our releases in many cases sound head and shoulders better than their mp3 or CD versions.   We are also aware that many times hi-res audio is better translated when the recording and mastering is done with hi-res audio in mind.  However we are simply a digital service provider and cannot hold back or not release particular albums.  We are not the judge and jury of people's art.  The musicians choose how they want their art to sound. 

At the very beginning of HDtracks due to our naivete we released a very few amount of albums that were not up to par with our hi-res designation.  This was due to hi-res audio being a very new thing, miscommunication between us and labels, us not doing our due diligence and a few other reasons.  Since then we have gone above and beyond to make sure we put out the very best product possible and test each and every file.  And in cases like the Beck album we give as much information as humanly possible to put forth all the information we have, so you the consumer can make an educated decision.


As you can see on this thread alone their are people who are very happy with the sound of the Beck album, once again because music is subjective and HDtracks is not going to take that away.  That is what makes music so amazing. 


With all that being said, we truly do welcome your feedback and will continue to try and bring high-resolution audio to higher heights and a more widely used audio format. Which will hopefully leader to higher awareness, when recording, mastering and delivering music. 


Thanks,


HDtracks

if you wsnt high res as a widely used format, do someghing with the prises.you are just too expensive. If I just pay 12 dollars a month I can get highres from streming high res "tidal".

 

[Roly1650]

if you wsnt high res as a widely used format, do someghing with the prises.you are just too expensive. If I just pay 12 dollars a month I can get highres from streming high res "tidal".

Except Tidal isn't hi res either. Check out the thread in this forum, Tidal are no more honest than HDTracks.
The whole hi res thing is a joke.

 

[prot]

Except Tidal isn't hi res either. Check out the thread in this forum, Tidal are no more honest than HDTracks.
The whole hi res thing is a joke.

There are already hundreds of milions involved in highres. If there is still any joke left, it's on us the consumers.
According to hdtracks, tidal, pono, etc, their product is guaranteed to be pure and genuine and to work instantly... we may have heard that before